[sdiy] DIY and Serge scans from Synapse, 197x

[Happy Harry]

Watch out... for the artwork redrawing it in your own
form will NOT violate the copyright...

but re-typing the words (even in a different font) WILL
violate the copyright.

For the pictures, the copyright lies in the visual expression...
but for text the copyright lies in the assembly of the words.

If you "re-wrote" the text (paraphrased) you would be OK... or
if you quoted short segments into what is otherwise a scholarly
work (such as a critique of the ARP 2600 manual)... you would
be OK.

I'd be inclined to just publish the work, and then cease and desist
if anyone from the long-gone company complains....  The copyright
establishes their right to collect damages... but it would be damn
hard to prove that you damaged sales of the ARP2600 or the out-of-print 
manual at this point. You might argue that you have actually enhanced their 
ability to make money by keeping the memory
alive...  ;^)

H^) harry (I'm not a lawyer but I play one on TV....)


>From: Neil Johnson <nej22 at hermes.cam.ac.uk>
>To: DJ Marmalade <djmarmalade at planetp.org>
>CC: synth-diy <synth-diy at dropmix.xs4all.nl>
>Subject: Re: [sdiy] DIY and Serge scans from Synapse, 197x
>Date: Fri, 12 Apr 2002 16:14:56 +0100 (BST)
>
>
> > > In the case of a paid magazine article, copyright is transferred to 
>the
> > > magazine for publication? If the magazine then closes, does the 
>copyright
> > > automatically transfer back to the author?
>
>In my experience with hobby electronics magazines the magazine retains the
>copyright of the printed page, ie. the layout, the artwork, the formatting
>etc.  So if I wanted to sell copies of the magazine articles, or put scans
>of them on the web I would need their permission.
>
>HOWEVER, if I redrew the diagrams, rephrased the text, reformatted the
>text in a different form, then I would NOT be infringing their copyright,
>because it would not be a COPY of what they had published.  As I
>understanf it, copyright protects the PRESENTATION, not the content
>(unlike patents).  Otherwise the first opamp inverter circuit published
>would claim "copyright" on all subsequent published opamp inverter
>circuits, which clearly is not the case :-)
>
>Ok, this doesn't help if you just want to scan in some docs and put them
>up on a website.  That would most definitely be a copyright violation,
>since you would be copying the material (remember: presentation, not
>content)  without the owner's permission.
>
>If you retyped the words, or redrew the schematic that would be a way to
>circumvent the copyright issue.  Tedious, but legally sound.
>
>Neil
>
>--
>Neil Johnson :: Computer Laboratory :: University of Cambridge ::
>http://www.njohnson.co.uk          http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~nej22
>----  IEE Cambridge Branch: http://www.iee-cambridge.org.uk  ----
>




_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com